Pew rents and the New Testament; can they be reconciled?

0,

PEW RENTS

THE NEW TESTAMENT.

CAN THEY BE RECONCILED

7

ROBERT C. OGDEN

■4^

Stom t^e &i6irari? of

(profeBBor T3?tfftdm I5^^^ (Breen

(J^equeaf^eb 6^? ^im to
t^e feifitari? of

(|f)ttnceton C^eofogicdf ^eminarg

BV 773.5 .04 1892
Ogden, Robert C. 1836-1913.
Pew rents and the New
Testament

^^.^

L ^

%^f^

./

„ . i

^, l?isi5,->< 5v(---^

PEW RENTS

AND

The new Testament.

Can They Be Reconciled '/

/

BY .

ROBERT C OGDEN.

Introduction by J. R. Miller, D.D.

pLEMING W^ J^EVELL (^OMPANY

PUBLISHERS
NEW YORK CHICAGO

30 Union Square, East. 148-150 Madison Street.

Copyright, 1892,
—BY-
FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY.

INTRODUCTION,

'T^HIS address needs no introduction. It
^ is on a subject which is at the front
among the practical questions of the day in
Christian work, and which is bound to be
considered, whether those w^ho look after
church finances want to consider it or not.

A new conscience concerning the use of
money is making its voice heard among
thoughtful Christian men. There is also a
manifest awakening on the subject of the re-
lation and responsibility of the Church to the
non-church -going and, in many cases, prac-
tically unchurched masses. First, Christian
people must be taught to give according to
the principles of the Gospel ; and, second, the
church doors must be thrown wide open to
all who would accept the invitation to hear
the Gospel.

The method of voluntary giving meets
both these conditions and furnishes the only
basis on which Christian work can be carried
on in the churches, while at the same time it

Unttobuctton*

is the only system which is in perfect har-
mony with the teachings of the New Testa-
ment.

The address is therefore most timely. Mr.
Ogden takes high ground, but his position is
unassailable. He is not a mere theorist ; he
works from the simple teachings of Jesus
Christ and the apostles, and at the same time
advocates a method which has already been
tried and proved.

It may require courage and a venture of
faith in ministers and churches to break
away from a traditional system with its
grooves all cut and to accept a new one
without the prestige of popularity, but if the
new is the Christian way it ought to be ac-
cepted regardless of immediate results ; and
there is no doubt that if Christ be in it, its
results will prove satisfactory.

My friend Mr. Ogden needs no introduc-
tion— only this word of hearty cheer, from
his fellow-worker,

J. R, Miller.

AA^ ADDRESS DELIVERED BEFORE

THE PRESBYTERIAN SOCIAL UNION OF

PHI LA DELPHI A .

Because I believe that all to whom I speak are

SEEKING truth IN RESPECT OF THE RIGHT METHOD OF
CHURCH SUPPORT, I WILLINGLY COMPLY WITH THE REQUEST
TO PRESENT SOME VIEWS IN BEHALF OF THE VOLUNTARY
SYSTEM.

THE PRESENT INTEREST ARISES FROM ANXIOUS AND HON-
EST INQUIRY. CONCLUSIONS SHOULD REST ON PRINCIPLE,

not expediency. expediency is in the saddle. the
tendency of the period is to adjust the methods of
Christianity to the apparently practical. Christ

NEVER surrendered AN IDEAL. "

PEW RENTS AND THE NEW
TESTAMENT.

nPHE relation of Christian progress to the
^ numbers of people and the material
growth of the nation arouses anxious solici-
tude upon the part of serious men. Study of
social conditions from the Christian point of
view does not give reassuring results.

The query forces itself and will not down
at our bidding : Are we following cunningly-
devised fables? I presume every man here
has met that question and answered it in the
negative. We are all satisfied that there is
no inherent weakness in the Christian theory
as given by Jesus Christ and His apostles.
Plain men such as we are cannot establish
the truth of Christianity by scholarship. We
assent to what Christian scholars tell us of
language, interpretation, criticism, and the
history of the sacred canon; but our faith,
belief, rests upon experience. We accept
this Christian theory because it commends it-
self to our reason ; it fits humanity. No hu-
man imagination could create Jesus Christ.

pew IRents ant)

Scholars may dispute about the authorship
of St. John's gospel, but our study of Jesus'
last prayer with His apostles proves Him di-
vine ; nothing can make us doubt. The more
seriously we examine, the clearer it all be-
comes ; and so, without scientific theological
scholarship, we believe. The principles are
correct.

If, therefore, the Christian theory is not a
misfit when applied to humanity, we must
seek for the reasons of present discourage-
ment elsewhere — that is, in Christian meth-
ods. Methods must be tried by principles.
In considering any mode of Christian activity
and procedure, we must ask. What has Chris-
tian experience and history to tell of it?
Will it stand the judgment of the Master's
code ?

vSuch a test is difficult. The mind clings
to notions made familiar by the usages of a
lifetime or of generations. We look at truth
through surrounding conditions. Our preju-
dices are often mistaken for principles.

A distinguished minister of our church*
says : " If men are not brought up to a level
with their religion, their religion they will
bring down to a level with themselves. The
truest, deepest things in any system impose

* Rev. C. H. Parkhurst, D.D.

XTbe IRew Testament,

a tax upon us, assert an expensive imperial-
ism over us. This makes them irksome, and
we go quietly about to devise some means by
which, without throwing our religion over-
board bodily, we can evade it in those re-
spects wherein it makes inconvenient de-
mands upon us."

These words, fresh with the breezes of
eternal truth, should scatter the mists of ex-
pediency and compromise that obscure the
outlines of the living issue involved in this
discussion.

GOSPEL-PREACHING MUST BE FREE.

Holding, therefore, that the right answer to
this question is vital to the Christian life of
the individual and the Church, and that the
answer deeply affects important personal and
associated Christian responsibilities, I will
state some reasons in support of the proposi-
tion:

That the free preaching of the Gospel by
means of voluntary support is the only sys-
tem that will meet the scriptural test, and
therefore it is preferable to the pew-renting
system.

By free preaching of the Gospel I mean
that the only condition precedent to the en-
joyment of the privileges of a house of pub-

10 ipevv IRents anb

lie worship is a willingness to aeeept sueh
privileges.

By voluntary support I mean conscience-
giving only, pure and simple.

The absolute need of the Gospel requires
no argument in this presence. Without the
Gospel humanity would be hopeless, and the
movement of the race would be toward dark-
ness and despair. With it, in the simplicity
impressed upon it by the life and teaching
of our Lord Jesus Christ, there is hope and
progress in all things, mental, moral, and
spiritual.

That the preaching of the Gospel must be
free to all would seem to be equally clear.
Some church methods imply doubt as to this
proposition. It therefore requires argument.

The nature of both God and man as re-
vealed in the Bible, and more especially in
the teachings of Jesus Christ and His apos-
tles, would alone affirm the truth of this
claim.

The universal fatherhood of God is clearly
expressed by Paul, Peter, James, John, and
Jude. It was taught most plainly by our
Lord Jesus Christ, since the prayer He gave
to all humanity begins " Our Father."

The Bible idea of man clearly includes
universal brotherhood. Solomon asserts that
"the rich and the poor meet together and

Zbc 1Revv Ucstamcnt ii

the Lord is the maker of them all. " Paul de-
clares to the Athenians, who claimed a supe-
rior and exclusive creation, that " God had
rhade of one blood all nations of men."
From the universal fall of man in the sin of
Adam to the universal offer of salvation in
the " whosoevers" of the New Testament, the
thought of brotherhood is all-pervasive.

The twin facts of the divine fatherhood
and the human brotherhood which inhere in
God as God and in man as man have a far
deeper significance in the light of the com-
plete revelation in Jesus Christ. The con-
ception of God as a loving Father so clearly
shown in the parable of the prodigal son,
and of all mankind as brothers so explicitly
taught in the parable of the good Samaritan,
hallow and beautify the mutual relations
which are inherent in the nature of both
God and man as moral beings.

The commands of the Saviour for the uni-
versal teaching of the Gospel and the in-
spired instructions of all the New Testament
writers are in harmony with the natural
rights of man in respect of the knowledge of
God.

Therefore the aggregate result of all these
considerations, natural and revealed, is the
fundamental principle that the preaching of
the Gospel must be free.

12 ipew IRents anb

It becomes us, therefore, to inquire as to
the means required by the divine teaching
for preserving the preaching of the Gospel
in its freedom.

Of course in a general sense the plain an-
swer to this question is. Christians are the
means. Persons who embrace the salvation
offered in the Gospel by accepting Jesus
Christ as Mediator and Saviour and confess-
ing Him before the world, enter into cove-
nant with God and make a pledge to human-
ity to live by the principles taught in His
Holy Word. To the extent of their ability
and capacity, material, mental, and spiritual,
they take the place of the Christ toward the
world — each Christian a smaller Christ. By
virtue of this covenant Christians are bound
to recognize that the great Head of the
Church did, by precept and by practice, enforce
the duty of institutional work to preserve
and extend His Gospel. Therefore Chris-
tians must give faithful and earnest support
to such organization for the worship of God
and the instruction of man as accord com-
pletely with the principles and methods indi-
cated by Jesus Christ and by the apostles who
so well knew His mind.

Ubc Bew Testament. 13

CHRIST S GOSPEL INSTITUTION.

Happily the gospels give full information
as to the organization that Christ used for
His public teaching. It was the synagogue.
Incidentally He taught on the hillside and
by the wayside, using a boat by the lake
shore as a pulpit or speaking to circles within
the homes that made Him welcome; again
in the temple as He had opportunity ; but
the synagogue was the organization that He
used principally and systematically.

Luke records in a very general way, as
indicating His constant practice, that He
"taught in the synagogues of Galilee." We
also read in Luke's gospel that " as His cus-
tom was, He went into the synagogue of Naza-
reth on the Sabbath day and stood up for to
read," and that He followed the reading with
wonderful instruction concerning the free
proclamation of His Gospel. Jesus Himself
said to the high priest, " I ever taught in the
synagogue." The record of the four gospels
is full and complete enough to establish the
fact that Jesus used the synagogue as the
proper organism for religious worship and
instruction. The apostles, evangelists, and
their converts followed His example so uni-
versally as to indicate it as the germ from
which Christianity has developed, in all its

14 ipew IRents an&

various systems, the individual church organ-
ization. The various church governments —
Congregational, Episcopal, Presbyterian —
recognize the congregation idea as derived
from the synagogue to be the unit of organ-
ization.

The synagogue, existing in great numbers
at the beginning of the Christian era, was
remarkably complete in its methods of wor-
ship and instruction. Not only did it pro-
vide the opportunities of public w^orship, but
its Bible-schools were the models for the
modern Sunday-school. It had of course
other functions than those referred to as ger-
mane to this disctission.

The synagogue congregation was a volun-
tary self-governing organization. It had no
relation to the Levitical priesthood. It cre-
ated its own government by elders, desig-
nated as men of leisure. It was supported
upon a voluntary system of alms, which the
elders, as one of their special duties, col-
lected and disbursed. But it nowhere ap-
pears that the privileges of the synagogue
were limited to such as contributed to its
support. The presence in one synagogue
of a man with an unclean spirit is not the
only evidence that undesirable people were
not excluded by caste. Uncircumcised pros-
elyte Jews had the privileges of the syna-

Ubc Hew Uestament^ 15

gogue, and there is other evidence beyond
that recorded by St. Luke that heathens and
proselytes of the gate built synagogues which
the Jews were willing to accept.

It is apparent that Jesus Christ did indi-
cate the synagogue as the organized method
by which His free Gospel should be preached
in its freedom. He claimed that one of the
testimonies to His divine mission was that
" the poor have the Gospel preached unto
them." It is evident that as the synagogue
was His usual preaching-place, He preached
in them not only to the rich, but to the poor
as well.

LAW OF LOVE AS THE SUPPORT OF WORSHIP.

Apropos to the historic place of the syna-
gogue in its relation to the simple principles
of Jesus that reqtiire the free preaching of the
Gospel in a free church, will be a consider-
ation of the proposition that the " worshipper
must support the worship."

It is, of course, admitted. The idea is
clearly taught in the early heathen religions
from which the tithe system was adopted
into the Jewish system, from the elaborate
instructions for tithing given in the Mosaic
Law, from the recognition of the tithes given
by Joseph and Mary in the case of the infant
Jesus, and from the usage in the support of

16 pew IRents anb

the synagogue. But it appears that even
the Jews were prepared for higher notions
of dut)^ as witness Zaccheus, who said, im-
mediately after his conversion " Behold the
half of my goods I give to the poor." Al-
ready had the Jewish mind reached upward
toward something better than legal bondage.
The spirituality of psalmists and prophets
had survived in some souls, and the early
dawn appeared of the higher law that was
perfected in the life and teachings of Jesus
of Nazareth.

In the spiritual kingdom of God founded
by Jesus Christ the slavery to letter and tra-
dition had no place. The Sermon on the
Mount was the emancipation proclamation
of the soul. The royal edict was sealed in the
blood of Calvary, and the legend of the seal
was, " It is finished. " The Mosaic principles
survived, but bondage to the letter was for-
ever ended. Burnt offerings and sacrifices,
the Levitical priesthood and the tithes so in-
timately associated with each were all swept
away when the veil of the Temple was rent
in twain. Religion was lifted to the far
grander ideal of the blood covenant of friend-
ship between the divine Christ and each
person who would love and serve Him.

Henceforward the principle was to be, " If
ye love me, keep my commandments;" "Ye

Ubc Bew Testament 17

are my friends if ye do whatsoever I com-
mand you;" "Anew commandment give I
unto you, that ye love one another;" "Thou
shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart
and with all thy soul and with all thy mind,
and thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."
And at the last, after the completed glory of
the resurrection and just before the final
glory of the ascension, there was a testing
command put upon all who make the cove-
nant of friendship — it was to go and teach
all nations; and this command His imme-
diate followers heeded carefully : " They went
forth and preached everywhere."

And so is it not clear that the Christian's
covenant is a personal one, that his covenant
involves the adoption of the Christ ethics to-
ward the w^orld, obedience to the Christ idea
in all things, and most emphatically in re-
spect of the spread of the Christ Gospel
througkout the world? Is it not clear that
the notion of the law of duty for duty's sake
is absorbed into the higher conception, ' duty
for love's sake?" Therefore as incidental to
but absolutely a part of the new covenant of
love, the Christian pledges himself by his
very confession to support the worship, and
thus forever disappears the technical tenet,
"the worshipper must support the worship."
The tithe principle is but a segment of the

18 ipew IRents an^

chrysalis of legal duty from which the Christ
brought forth the winged spirituality of love.

Therefore by just as much as the Chris-
tian fails to sustain the Christ idea that the
Gospel preaching must be free, does he fail to
be a Christian. He therefore fails to keep
the covenant between his soul and his God.

That such was the apostles' view of the
pledge to support the Gospel is evident from
many passages in the Acts and the Epistles.
A brief allusion will suffice to show that St.
Paul considered that the Christian doctrine
of giving must be voluntary giving, " not
grudgingly nor of necessity. " The measure
of giving was prosperity. The spirit of giv-
ing must be generous, for *' the Lord loveth
a cheerful giver." All this finds apt illus-
tration in his appeal to the Corinthian Church
on behalf of the poor saints in Jerusalem.

The Epistle of James is a protest against
the slightest distinction in the assembly of
Christians. It is more. It is a command
that in the congregation there shall be no
respect of persons.

Attention has been directed to the various
tithings under the Mosaic law and to " the
generous offerings of the early Christian
Church," as showing the duty of the worship-
per to support the worship. I think this an
erroneous association of ideas, which should

Ubc IRew Uestament* 19

be carefully separated. The tithe was a tax,
and it may be cited in justification of the duty
of " the worshipper to support the worship; "
nevertheless it cannot be made to justify
the pew-rent system. The tithe did support
the worship, but it did not secure a proprie-
tary legal right to any particular, exclusive
private portion of the temple for the use of
the tithe-payer.

But the generous offerings of the early
Christian Church were quite different ; they
were entirely of the free will. Their volun-
tary character was proof that the donors rec-
ognized no tax. The contributions were a
joyful fulfilment of the pledge of their con-
fession in which they said, " we will support
the worship. " Such gifts are privileges. To
describe them as the " taxation" by which
duty is performed is to mistake their char-
acter.

It is well to remember that tithes are men-
tioned in only two chapters of the New Tes-
tament— in Zaccheus' description of himself
and in the ninth of Hebrews. The purpose
of the latter was to prove that " the law made
nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a
better hope did, by which we draw nigh
unto God." And we should further notice
that the New Testament has absolutely no
references to taxes or taxation, except in

20 ipew IRents anb

a merely descriptive and historical sense.
Even such allusions are very few, very brief,
and purely incidental.

Assuming the correctness of the reason-
ing- presented in support of the propositions
that Christ and His apostles taught the free
preaching of the Gospel by means of volun-
tary support — conscience contributions — let
us examine a little into the application made
by the early Church of these teachings.

FREE PREACHING A DIVINE COxMMAND.

The frequency with which Jesus freely
proclaimed a free Gospel indicates that there
were Pharisaic Jews who sought chief seats
in the synagogues. To rebuke this spirit
and to establish the new dispensation upon a
perfect basis of human equality He often re-
peated the proclamation of Gospel freedom.
Six times the evangelists record his words,
"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."
It is not fanciful to apply the " let him hear"
not only to the individual, but to such of his
fellow-men as might be indisposed to " let
him hear." The enforced guests from the
hedges and highways, the call to repentance
of men everywhere, the preaching to all the
world and every creature — these show clearly
what is the Christ idea of the conditions upon
which the right to hear the Gospel rests

Ube 1Rew Uestament. 21

— compulsory freedom — more than free, if
possible. Such was the seed thought, the di-
vine germ, which was to bring forth fruit an
hundredfold.

The early Church responded quickly to
these conditions, and the apostles, doubtless,
often recalling the incident of Jesus and the
woman of Samaria at Jacob's well, offered
salvation through Christ to the Roman, the
Greek, the Scythian as freely as to the Jew.
A distinguished writer refers to the preach-
ing of this Gospel alike to "philosophers,
laborers, rulers, soldiers, and heathen slaves"
in audiences that recognize "no distinction
of classes, but senator and slave sit side by
side in its assemblies. It lifts the humble
without degrading the high. It acknowl-
edges no limitations to race ; but as soon as
the minds of its earliest disciples have been
enlightened it is by them proclaimed without
pause to all who will hear it, whether in Asia,
Africa, or Europe." * Such is the testimony
of a great Christian scholar to the spirit with
which the early Church entered upon the
mission of the Master.

By this threefold standard evolved from the
nature of moral beings divine and human,
from the teachings of Jesus, from the history

*Rev. R. S. Storrs. D.D.

22 pew IRents anb

of the early Church, must the pew-rent sys-
tem, all-controlling wherever it exists, be
tried. If it can stand the test, well ; if not,
let it be anathema.

I hold that it cannot stand the test ; that it
contradicts and subverts the spirit of the Gos-
pel ; that it is opposed to the idea that the
Gospel must be freely preached; that it has
worked incalculable harm to persons ; that it
has introduced false standards of church asso-
ciation and ministerial success; and that it
has largely perverted the Church in this
country from its plain and simple work of
serving humanity.

CHARITY THE SPIRIT OF REFORM.

But in an effort to make good these some-
what strong and positive statements I must
be relieved of the suspicion of personal con-
demnation of an)^ who may dissent from my
views, nor must it be supposed that I ques-
tion the sincerity of any church and minister
practising the pew-rent system. The sys-
tem is an inheritance, and no legacy is so
bad as other people's mistakes, except only
other people's quarrels. The custom of gen-
erations has crystallized it. Its promoters
were little aware that they were bequeathing
to their successors a fungus system which

Ube IRew ITestament* 23

found friendly soil and congenial atmosphere
in the artificial social life which a sudden ac-
cess of wealth has created out of the mar-
vellous material development of our country.
Such an evil as I hold this pew-rent system
to be, upheld as it is by the usages of more
than two centuries, is not to be cured by de-
nunciation . Rather accord what the question
of its propriety is receiving here — honest,
earnest, kindly, and intelligent discussion — in
order that we may come at last to the light
concerning it.

PEW RENTS A LEGACY OF ERROR.

Historical data concerning the pew system
exist, but are not readily accessible. We
know, however, that seats in churches were
originally provided for the aged and infirm
and for persons of rank. There is a record,
doubtless the result of some definite case,
bearing date of 1617, that it was an offence
for a young lady to sit with her mothei\
There was perhaps no thought beyond that
of easy collection of revenue in the pew tax
of our colonial period, but it quickly made
a proscription. The poor, relegated to gal-
leries or free seats, were thus marked in the
audience with the sad badge of poverty.
How serious the strain upon the heavenly

24 pew IRents anb

grace in the case of poor saints, perhaps the
choicest ungathered clusters from living
branches of the true vine! How hopeless
the influence upon others whose poverty of
pocket was the fitting reflection of starving
souls !

And so it has gone on to its logical com-
pleteness. The metropolitan centres show
many examples of the full flower of the sys-
tem in churches consecrated to God but de-
voted to human pride. There are churches
that seem to have been especially contrived
for the very large class seeking social pre-
cedence, and who are willing to buy at any
price — and often the bigger the price the
better — a conspicuous place in a conspicuous
church simply and only for the social dis-
tinction it confers. Religion is too often
the slave of Fashion. The pew system fur-
nishes the fetters.

It is needless to pursue this line of dis-
cussion farther, and I will therefore briefly
notice such considerations in favor of pew
rentals as I have not already touched upon.

It is also said that pew rentals give oppor-
tunity for a gradation of payments according
to ability. The reply is they do not ; for an
arbitrary bargain is made that ignores in re-
spect of Gospel support the principle "as
God has prospered, " and nobody but God who

Ube 1Rew XTestament. 25

has prospered and the recipient who has
been prospered knows the prosperity. Yes,
according- to means let there be a gradation
of payments, but leave the question of ability
to give where the inspired apostle left it —
between God and the individual conscience.
" As a man purposeth in his heart, so let him
give" is the command. It is dangerous to
substitute any other principle in any duty in-
volving giving.

The right to exact payment of the temple
tax is given as an argument for the pew-
rent system. The right was clearly ad-
mitted by Christ in the miracle of the fish
and coin, but we must remember this was be-
fore the completion of the Old Dispensation.
Whei?e were those right safter the Crucifixion
and Calvary? The temple in this respect at
least was not in the Saviour's thought of
organization for His Church. All the or-
ganization, then, that we have clusters about
synagogue, ecclesia, congregation ; and the in-
spiration for their support is not tax or tithes,
but love as the fulfilling of the law.

The higher law involved in the voluntary
support of worship bears on all alike and
makes the obligation absolutely universal.
The entire congregation can be made to feel
it equally when faithfully instructed in the
duties implied in Christianity. The pew-

26 pew IRents anb

rental system is necessarily discriminating,
partial, incomplete, and not universal. Con-
cerning- the supplementary offerings, I can
say only that the theory of them is inadmis-
sible ; for does not the covenant of church
membership expressly carry with it a com-
plete consecration not only of person, but of
property?

Regarding the several grounds of expedi-
ency which are urged in behalf of pew rentals,
I would maintain:

That the unity of family worship can be
equally well sustained by the voluntary as
by the rental plan. Also, the sentiment of
association may be pushed too far both in
respect of the pew and the church edifice.
Who of experience among us cannot recall
numerous instances in w^hich the beautiful
sentiments of association have developed
into inconsiderate selfishness? This in turn
has often been translated into a worship of
boards and bricks and stones that kept the
Lord's capital only too safely invested in
properties no longer useful.

Two other points of desirability claimed
for the pew-rental system should be consid-
ered together, namely : that by it the personal
interest in the sanctuary is deepened and
the attendance upon the services increased.
The personal interest, I claim, is Justin pro-

Zbc IKlew Testament* 27

portion to the investment of both money and
personal service, and it certainly follows that
the interest developed by voluntary sacrifice
of money, time, sympathy, and service will
vastly outw^eigh that created by a mere
financial contract. The general experience
also is that, given the right conditions of min-
ister and people, the attendance upon public
worship is increased by the free-pew system.
European experience in free public sanctu-
aries is cited against free pews, but my own
observation teaches otherwise. I have no-
where heard a more simple Gospel nor en-
joyed more genuine privileges of worship
than in the great popular congregations of
the English cathedrals. The evangelical
churches in Switzerland give beautiful illus-
tration of the meeting on common ground in
free seats of all sorts and conditions of men:
Families sit together by coming early to
service, and equality in the house of God
is recognized by the universal simplicity of
the women's dress, which challenges the
stranger to distinguish by any outward token
of garb which are peasants, factory hands,
or the wives and daughters of the wealthiest
families. Swiss Protestantism has lessons
for America. One of the most highly re-
spected ecclesiastical authorities states con-
cerning the pew system in England, where

28 pew IRents anb

it has been known for many generations and
where some of its worst abuses have ripened
to maturity, that " to-day, in the Church of
England, it is as verily a decaying and van-
ishing usage as is the use of the whipping-
post or the imprisonment of men for debt. "
It is also asserted that in England, and " es-
pecially in the Church of England itself,
there has been a marked — in many cases a
vast — increase in the number of the public
services and in the numbers of those who
are in attendance upon them. And it is
equally idle to deny that that increase has
been synchronous with the growth of free
churches. " * This is the testimony that comes
to me concerning the free worship of Europe.
Certainly I would be the last to advocate
state religion ; but there is one thing sure,
and it is that while state churches may cre-
ate an aristocracy of priests, they certainly
create a democracy of people in worship.
St. Paul's Cathedral and Westminster Abbey,
the Court Church in Dresden and the Cathe-
dral in Cologne, all prove the democracy
in worship, and possibly neither would es-
tablish the aristocracy of priests.

To the claim that the pew-rent system gives
opportunity to do good through the abundant

* Right Rev. H. C. Potter, D.D.

Zbc IRevv Testament* 29

exercise of Christian hospitality, pews becom-
ing- a means of grace to their possessors, when
sharing their privilege with others, I give
most cordial assent. By all means let us
have with the pew system the graces of
Christian hospitality and courtesy. I yield to
none in gratitude that there are many Chris-
tian pew-holders who conscientiously prac-
tise these graces. But to quote this hospi-
tality is to condemn the ethics of the whole
plan. The kindly card of invitation to a
particular pew is a courtesy which denies
my right to hear the Gospel in the church
that contains that pew unless it has charity
seats at my disposal. The invitation is on
a par with the courtesy a manager may give
me to a reserved seat in a place of amusement.
The preaching of the Gospel by Christ's
terms is free, and the Christian's covenant
is a pledge to keep it free ; but the rented
pew is a barrier which takes away the right
to share in the worship and listen to the Gos-
pel, though haply it may be heard by cour-
tesy or charity. The social equal may get
the courtesy, the social inferior the charity.

It often happens that the courtesy is least
where the attendance is greatest. Large
popularity of church and preacher is unlikely
to develop hospitality of people.

It must, however, be freely admitted that

30 pew IRents an^

in many pew-rent churches hospitality is
shown to strangers. That does not at all
reach the root of the matter. It involves the
question, " On what terms is a worshipper to
be admitted to God's house? Is he to be ad-
mitted there upon sufferance as the toler-
ated guest of some other fellow-being who
owns in that holy place an exclusive right to
the occupancy of so many square feet, or as
a fellow-citizen of the household of God, in
that Divine Republic in which there is nei-
ther Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, but where
men are all one in Christ?" *

And were there nothing beyond the treat-
ment now accorded to such strangers as com-
monly seek to attend public worship as guests,
this discussion as a practical matter would
be idle. But from an ethical standpoint it
would in any case be important.

PERTINENT QUESTIONS.

What is to be the outcome of the prevail-
ing pew-rent method? Has it any influence
in deciding whether this generation is to
hand over the Church to its successors im-
proved or degraded? Are pew rents one of
the forces that increase the growing class of

* Right Rev. H. C. Potter, D.D.

XTbe IRew Uestament 3i

unchurched Christians? Are pew rents a
help or a hindrance in the work of reaching
the worldly millions — the degraded classes
at both the top and the bottom of society
and all the gradations of humanit}^ between?
Have pew rents anything to do with the ten-
dency to create a wall of moral separation
between classes in the church and between
the church and the world?

These are not idle questions. At each new
angle of this discussion some fresh issue
challenges attention. Shall the world have
the free preaching of the Gospel as a courtesy,
a charity, or a right? Pledged Christians
must answer.

Then, too, it is reasonably claimed that free
seats encourage the human weakness that
seeks to get church privileges without cost,
and that the pew-rental system corrects the
evil. But is it a correction that corrects in
the Christ spirit? Can any one prove that
the buying of a place in the house of God
ever made a mean soul great or liberal? The
proposed remedy is worse than the disease.
I can imagine no surer cure for sinful selfish-
ness than the faithful preaching of a Gospel
that shall keep the stingy soul face to face
with duty as commanded by God, and no
compromising board of trustees to intervene,
as the assignees of God's claim, to settle with

32 pew IRents an^

meanness by accepting a per cent. — five, ten,
or fifty — upon a debt which should be paid,
principal and interest, to the uttermost cent.

But it is asked, in view of the pew rentals,
" Is not salvation free?" The reply is, " Yes,
as water is free. Water is free to consumers,
but the cost of delivery is not free, as wit-
ness the just taxes for water-mains and other
expensive devices for its delivery."* But
the simile stops short. Yes, salvation is free,
free as water to suffering, thirsty men. Com-
mon humanity demands that all men pos-
sessing water shall not only furnish but de-
liver it to men who are, consciously or un-
consciously, dying, of thirst.

Salvation must be free and the preaching
of it free — free as the air which none may
limit, free as the charity of Almighty God,
who giveth to all men liberally and upbraid-
eth not.

Time forbids detailed objections to the
pew-rent system drawn from illustrative
existing facts, such as instances of great
preachers, renowned for piety, learning,
and eloquence, who speak to sparse audi-
ences in their own eminently proper pew-
rent churches, and yet command crowds
when preaching in public halls or in

*Rev. H. C.McCook, D.D.

xrF3C IRew UcetamcnU 33

churches of other cities. Of churches in
which every seat is rented and annual auc-
tions are held at which the choice is bid off
at a premium. Of churches in which fash-
ion and music combine to create popularity,
and in which strangers are notified, by man-
ner or word, that the privileges of art, social
affinity, and the incident of Gospel-preach-
ing are reserved for such as pay for them.
Of great-souled preachers whose careers,
marked for large success, are stunted, and
whose work is dwarfed by the pew-rent lim-
itations until failure more or less complete
ensues. Of locked pews, no longer popular,
which it is illogical to condemn, for the
right to own or hire includes the right to
lock.

A great catalogue of points of condemna-
tion of the pew-rent system awaits a repeti-
tion which I will not make.

CONSCIENCE THE CHRIST CASHIER.

And now leaving the Social Demon, so
powerful in Lhe Protestant Churches of Amer-
ica, to a little repose in his stronghold, Social
Caste^ a fortification founded on pew rents, I
ask attention, in conclusion, to the voluntary
system.

If the nature of God and man, the teach-

34 pew IRents anb

ings and practice of Jesus and His apostles,
and the precedent of the early Church have
been truly stated, the commands that the
preaching of the Gospel shall be maintained
free in proper houses of worship, with proper
organization, and that the maintenance shall
be by voluntary gifts alone, are impera-
tive.

Admit the facts, and these twin principles
must control in every individual church or-
ganization. They are as binding as the Ten
Commandments.

But a great chorus of objections is welling
up from many minds. It will be immedi-
ately said that voluntary church support is
not practical — it will not Vv^ork. That is not
in the case. If the principle is right it must
work. For special purposes it might be
handy to abolish the command " Thou shalt
not steal. " But it exists and is binding — it
must work and it does.

Again, we will be told that it has been
tried and it has failed. I do not admit it.
Facts drawn from the Protestant Episcopal
Church in this country show wonderful prog-
ress in the extension of the free-church sys-
tem. For notable instances examine St.
Ann's on the Heights, Brooklyn, or St.
George's, New York. Experience in favor
of free churches grows rapidly in Great Brit-

Zhc 1Flew Testament. 35

ain. Some of our churches in Philadelphia
give testimony to the same effect.

Conspicuous failures there have been. I
regret that time forbids a reference to de-
tails within my personal knowledge. It is
nearly twenty years since a very prominent
preacher * put the question of this evening as
a burden on my mind. Observation of unsuc-
cessful experiments with so-called free pews
has influenced me decidedly in the conclusion
that the preaching of the Gospel must be
free. The difficulty in these cases was that
the voluntary system was not voluntary.
Pledges were expected. Shall I say exacted?
And a pledge is one or more degrees better
than a pew rent according to the way in
which it is secured. // also violates the
Christian covenant and substitutes a human
for a divine obligation.

Of all the churches practising the volun-
tary system I know of only one that accepts
it in simple completeness. All others of
which I have knowledge, and several that are
progressing successfully toward the right,
have some sort of pledge.

In some of them the relation between a
lifting spiritual life in the congregation and
the method of Gospel support is clear. But

*Rev. T. De Witt Talmage, D.D.

3G pew IRents ant)

they have not yet attained to the best. The
true standard is found only in the Christian's
confession and the obligation to stipport the
free preaching of the Gospel thereby volun-
tarily assumed. Maintain that standard by
keeping the person face to face with duty.
Then trust him.

Ask a man to put a white ribbon on his
coat to show his Christian temperance and
you discount his Christianity. Ask a man
for pew rent or pledge to support the Gospel,
you doubt his Christian profession. In the
one case the temperance (in respect to the use
of liquors), and in the other case the pew
rent, is made to stand for Christianity. Any
doubt thrown upon the Christian confession
degrades it.

In this practical age compromise and ex-
pediency have obscured the ideal. The
grand duty now before the Christian world
is to restore the ideal. Accomplish that, and
our discussion will not be upon tithes and
pew rents. The question will be. Are we
saving men?

The Christian's contract is with God, The
man-made machine, trustees, organization,
something, steps in with a human improve-
ment on the divine method and says we
want security. The session, the spiritual
guardians of the church, receive the member.

Ube IRevv Uestament, 37

The board of trustees, the secular guardians,
step in, and want a money contract to secure
the pledge of the church covenant for the
rental of a part of God's real estate.

A secular side of a church organization is
an anachronism. That the place in which a
man may sit in a church has any relation to
the money he gives for church support is an
incongruity. When human needs and Chris-
tian graces can be calculated in coin that
may come. Not before. These heresies
should be abandoned immediately and for-
ever.

The Christian church is a family. St.
Paul says so. In the Church the family
ideal should be recognized. The family ob-
ligation is expensive. The family instinct
can usually be trusted. Bring in this lofty
idea of obligation and trust the Christian
grace. Then the working together of all
things for good to them that believe will
bountifully appear. Christian graces will
be multiplied and church support will be
vastly enhanced.

In the Holland church to which I have
alluded the contributions for the support are
voluntary entirely. The only pledges are
those made secretly between the person and
his God. The treasurer will keep, when de-
sired, a record by numbered envelopes of

38 ipevv IRents ant)

contributions, and will inform the giver once
a year the gross sum given, but he is in
honor bound not to divulge any contribution
to any other than the donor. The church
expenses are not large, something less than
$4,000 a year, but the contributions are am-
ple. The church has never been in debt
over the first of any month, and no demand
has ever been made to make up a deficiency.
And I have a guess, only a guess, that should
the treasurer state the per cent, of the largest
recorded contribution to the sum collected
its smallness would surprise you. This to
anticipate the question. Do not some one or
two persons bear the bulk of the burden?
No, the letter and the spirit are in perfect
accord. Should the experience of a single
young church be taken as conclusive on this
subject? The answer is no. The Script-
ures should settle ; this church merely illus-
trates it.

It will also be asked. Will the adoption of
a voluntary system such as has been described
affect the support of the ministry imfavor-
ably? In my opinion, no. Reliance upon
the highest principles of Christianity and
humanity would be better, far better, and
give far greater money results than the pres-
ent degenerate, material, compromising ex-
pedient.

Zbc IRew Testament* 39

Robertson says, in one of his lectures on
the Corinthians : " Appeal to the highest mo-
tives, appeal whether they be there or no, for
you make them where you do not find them. "
" Let men say what they will of human nat-
ure's evil, a generous, real, unaffected con-
fidence never fails to elicit the Divine spark. "

Can a better Christianity than Paul's be
discovered? To him Christianity was Christ.
It has been truthfully said that " Paul's own
Christianity was: a few facts respecting his
Redeemer's life, a few of his master's pre-
cepts, like 'It is more blessed to give than to
receive, ' out of which he educed all Chris-
tian principles. "

Our evening will not have been wasted if
we earnestly seek the Divine authority for
our beliefs on this question, whatever those
beliefs may be, and in this connection I
would commend to thoughtfiil study the 9th
chapter of 11. Corinthians and the 2d chapter
of James.

For myself, sincerely believing in the truth
of the principles I have endeavored to state,
I shall hope to see them prevail until, as a
writer on this subject has said, "in the house
of God at any rale the sound of buying and
selling, of hiring and of leasing, shall be for-
ever silenced. "

And thus my hope is that it may come

40 pew IRents.

about in respect of pew rents and other vi-
tal matters, that we may fulfil ourdtity to the
ages by handing down our Christian state-
ments, forms, and methods purer and better
than we received them. For who of us here
present desires that our successors of the
2oth century shall say of us, as we say of our
predecessors of the i8th century, that we left
them an inheritance of mistakes?

.€♦>

.^V^ I^\^^/,^ -:^*^^'

Princeton Theological Seminarv Libraries r^^i^M.^

jj^K "?^ -V^^Ts^

F^

>4^ r^

^^ 1 1012 01234 9363 f »4 ^ -^^^

f:

iS- v?^^

^ajt;

'. ~'*

^A ■>

^^'^.W-^-^'M

m